Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
mongrel
Trad climber
Truckee, CA
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 01:08am PT
|
Jfs, probably just a regular Vista, so you may well be right that the newer version has a much better antenna. Store sales staff might not know all that much about the inner workings, but Garmin is pretty good about responding to questions, so anyone contemplating a purchase would be well advised to contact them directly. I certainly agree PacNW forest can be pretty damn dense, although there is just one viciously thorny plant instead of many, and practically no stinging insects. And your unit better be moderately waterproof, just like in the tropics! My Garmins have done really well in heavy downpours.
The best new GPS antennas are dual channel, I don't know if any recreational-grade units have those, but they work dramatically better in dense cover. I was never very impressed with WAAS or whatever it's now called. Didn't seem to make a damn bit of difference whether it was turned on or off. Maybe it's a big difference in perfect reception but I hardly ever go anywhere that's the case.
Also, I do not mean to dis Magellan or any other brand, I just have no experience with them.
|
|
bergbryce
Mountain climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 02:51am PT
|
I'm in the market as well...
I'd like a recreational unit that is WAAS compatible or can get me sub 5 meter accuracy.
The GPSMap 60CSx sounds promising.
Any other suggestions?
I've used an eTrex in the past for taking waypoints and stuff and it's been fine for that but it takes forever to get a signal.
For the record I can use map and compass. A GPS is usually too much of a PITA to mess with but sometimes it's invaluable and can take and store data that cannot otherwise be stored.
|
|
Captain...or Skully
climber
or some such
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 02:59am PT
|
Maps are cheap, they last, require very little power, though you MAY have to employ some real land navigation.
I'm biased. Yes. Not sorry, though.
Good luck.
|
|
deuce4
climber
Hobart, Australia
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 05:13am PT
|
If you have access to GIS software, you can load your own maps on the DeLorme units. I have one, and it works great, though the screen is a bit too small.
|
|
reddirt
climber
PNW
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 05:24am PT
|
...my two partners' altimeters disagreed on the altitude by 200 feet.
By the way, the best hand held GPS altitude accuracy (NOT sensitivity) is about +/- 100 feet.
I wonder if the altimeters were both calibrated at the same time/place.
The precision/accuracy of barometric vs satellite-based altimeters may warrant a separate discussion. I was always under the impression that barometric was more reliable.
|
|
reddirt
climber
PNW
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 05:30am PT
|
So, the newer(est?) cell phones may have real GPS in them? I got to go look that up.
I almost never turn mine on as it's a battery drain.
|
|
jfs
Trad climber
Upper Leftish
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 11:31am PT
|
I'm in the market as well...
I'd like a recreational unit that is WAAS compatible or can get me sub 5 meter accuracy.
The GPSMap 60CSx sounds promising.
Any other suggestions?
For recreational and hiking based uses you can ignore WAAS and any claimed boost in accuracy. It was originally created for use in aviation where you might actually expect to be able to receive the correcting signals from ground based stations. That's a pipe dream for most of us on a hike into the middle of the Sierra or North Cascades or wherever. I actually turn WAAS off as soon as I start using a new GPS since there has even been some indication that it can lead to signal degradation when used at surface level. It's a marketing thing...nothing else.
The 60CSx was a good unit. It is still available but in diminishing supply. It's been replaced by the 62s and 62st. I do not use it simply because it is bulky and heavier than the eTrex series.
I've used an eTrex in the past for taking waypoints and stuff and it's been fine for that but it takes forever to get a signal.
Most likely this is also an issue of the older antenna. Any of the modern eTrex's that I use now get a fix within about 30 seconds. Look for an "H" in the model name to determine if it has this new antenna/programming.
And I promise I'm not a shill for Garmin. =) I am admittedly more comfortable with there units than other brands but have used the competition and always end up coming back to Garmin despite some of the silly, extra crap they keep adding into their units.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 11:40am PT
|
I wouldn't thing so but does anyone know whether leaving the WAAS on saps the
batteries faster than without?
|
|
jfs
Trad climber
Upper Leftish
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 11:41am PT
|
TK, those are generally GIS or utility type GPS's that depend on local network/internet/wireless connectivity and (I think) additional antenna stations in order to correct the actual GPS signal on your unit. This is getting outside my area of knowledge but they are not units that would be much use in the field by a hiker or climber.
That ... and they cost something like $6,000. =)
Reilly - not that I know of. But like I said, there is rarely any benefit to using WAAS while at ground level in the hills. Maybe sporadically but not enough to warrant leaving it on imo.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 11:41am PT
|
Actually, the accuracy has gotten much better. I've seen Trimbles that boast <45 cm vertical accuracy... Everyone loves to quote the 200' GPS accuracy thing in defense of their antique watches, but practice is usually around 50' or better. It really depends on your signal quality and your particular GPS unit.
+1 for getting one of the latest GPS units. Ignore the extra features - it's just software. I have had several over the years. My latest is a Forerunner 310XT with the Sirf Insta Fix (or whatever). It picks up position in my basement. The tracks over switchbacks are more detailed and repeatable by far over any device prior. Switchbacks usually make a mess of tracks, especially below treeline, but not with this device. It has a 20 hr battery life. The technology moves fast. I have a 76CS, similar to the 60CS mentioned above a few times. It's really old and outdated at this point in comparison.
I have made maps off the web for other countries Garmin didn't cover. It's a tedious PITA. The thing here is to have a paper map, then use the GPS to set lots of waypoints (as "wands"). Power up, set waypoint, power off. Tracks use too much battery, for when you are on a longer trip in the mountains. When you plot these waypoints, you will have a lot of information.
|
|
phylp
Trad climber
Millbrae, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 15, 2011 - 11:42am PT
|
All of this information is really very useful. Thanks so much everyone!
And I have to admit it to you, Rokjox, LOL, it IS my husband who will read thru all of this and understand it. The wife = me is pretty technology minus. I'll learn how to use the thing if we get one. I do at least know how to use an instruction manual!
Honestly I'm not sure the thing would get used more than a few times a year. And it probably wouldn't even be turned on most of the time unless something seemed like it was starting to get really confusing. The situation that Werner described, with loosing the trail because of snow, is the most likely scenario. It happened twice during a recent hiking trip up around lake Tahoe. Not being out in a snow storm, in my case, but just losing the trail because of the huge snowpack remaining, and not being able to figure out where to go. We were in no danger at all of being lost, as it was easy to retrace our steps. But the snowfields were easy to cross so it was just a bit frustrating not to be able to get to the lake we wanted to get to in unfamiliar terrain without prominent landmarks and with the trail invisible under snow.
The reason this came up yesterday was that yesterday we took a little 6 mile hike in the east bay. The trail we were on started on as a very narrow track through a large area populated by cows. Every darn cow path looked exactly the same as the "real" trail. And even though we had a little topo map provided by the park, the landmarks were not exactly crystal clear. We tried to use the GPS on the cell phone just to confirm our intuition that it was time to start heading east, and the GPS function worked fine, but because there was no cell signal, the map for the area could not download, so it was useless. Again, we were never lost...
So thanks to Clint I will be picking one up this AM to borrow for our hiking trip for next week. I'll report back how we liked it and if it came in handy!
|
|
TKingsbury
Trad climber
MT
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 11:48am PT
|
I know jfs...just pointing it out...
Most folks will find those style of GPS a bit too much...but they are my preferred device...but I am in the GIS field....
The Garmin Oregon has been well received here at the office...my boss prefers it over the trimble for his needs...
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 12:06pm PT
|
Actually, the accuracy has gotten much better. I've seen Trimbles that boast <45 cm vertical accuracy... That sounded like BS, so I read the spec. That accuracy is basically after some server matches your position to a map. No cell coverage for connection to a server, no 45cm accuracy. How do you even confirm 45cm?? Have such surveys ever been done?
That said, I have a shitload of experience running trails and taking tracks with several Forerunners - 50' is a good rule of thumb, it's usually better. Do you really need better? Is that map from the 1960's made with protractors, levels and barometers any better?
|
|
TKingsbury
Trad climber
MT
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 12:13pm PT
|
Never said it was needed or easy, just pointing out that vertical accuracy has improved.
Whether you can confirm(or need)that accuracy is another matter.
|
|
stevep
Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 12:14pm PT
|
Newer smartphones (my Droid X for example) have an actual GPS in them, they don't just use cell triangulation. And there are some pretty good apps. But battery life is terrible when using GPS. 2-3 hours max in my experience.
So for my mountain biking, I have a Garmin Edge 701. It works very well, and has a barometric altimeter in it in addition to the GPS. So I have a reasonable degree of confidence in the altitude tracking.
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 01:37pm PT
|
I have the Garmin Oregon series. Most of the guys on our rescue team also have that unit, and many of them are hunters. We also spend the extra money to get the detailed maps for the area. These units lock in quickly and display most of the trails/forest roads in the area, even some that have been decommissioned or abandoned. In broad daylight, we generally don't need them to navigate, but they are useful for our incident command plotting where we are. In the winter or at night, they do keep us on track. Some of the programming is intuitive. Other features take some time to figure out. Working with a buddy that has the same unit, actually looking at the instructional DVD, or attending an orientation would help you get up the learning curve more quickly.
The color maps eat more juice than the black and white. For me, it is worth it. I wouldn't add the radio to that unit, too. Those consume power even faster, especially if you talk on that radio. As always, never be totally dependent on a battery powered device. You still need to carry a map.
I wear an altimeter watch in addition to getting elevation off the GPS. I find that most altimeter watches are more accurate than the altimeter on the GPS. With a map and an altimeter watch, I can leave my GPS powered off many times. Then when I am close to my significant landmark (in terms of elevation), I can fire up my GPS and zero in on the critical "turn" or landmakr as needed.
|
|
Max Neale
climber
California
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 04:37pm PT
|
All, I work for SuperTopo and Outdoor Gear Lab and am in the middle of a handheld GPS review. I have 10 units from Magellan, DeLorme, and Garmin. My full time job involves 40+hrs/week of environmental science field work so I've been using these in addition to $5k Trimble units nearly everyday to map rare plants, define project areas, etc. All the data I've been collecting gets corrected (differential correction)and analyzed in ArcGIS, so I've been able to compare the accuracy of the scientific units (external backpack antenna) to the recreational models.
As for beta: If you're looking to buy and can hold off until the review is done in a couple of months, do so. Of the various makes I've been most impressed with Garmin because their interface is easier to use. Despite any biases from growing up near the DeLorme HQ in Maine, I've found their units to be most disappointing. The OGL review will discuss the many techy aspects of the units, their applications, as well as buying advice; topics that are beyond the scope of my post here.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 05:19pm PT
|
I find that most altimeter watches are more accurate than the altimeter on the GPS That's a very interesting observation.
Someone asked if my two partners' altimeters had been corrected before they disagreed by 200 feet. No. One of my partners tried to correct his wristw#tch altimeter at a known location but couldn't figure out how to do it without the instruction manual.
Applying technology for non-technical users requires a reliable, well designed, user friendly product. Trouble is the marketing hype will nearly always claim the very best possible lab based statistics, not what's going to occur in real usage by a non-technical user.
Can't wait for Max Neale's review.
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011 - 05:33pm PT
|
Agreed. I found the calibrate and adjust buttons for the watch. I recalibrate at known landmarks. The GPS isn't as easy. If you ever noticed hiking up switchbacks, your GPS waypoints can stack up on each other, and the units don't always update the elevation constantly. All that button pushing eats up battery life. SO I rely on the watch for elevation and the GPS for coordinates, map, and bearings.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!